Searching through a 1942 edition of the Manchester Guardian (now theguardian), I came across this letter dated October 2nd of that year. It’s from a J. L. Edwards of Whitefield.

It is to be hoped that members of the House of Commons will avail themselves to the full of the opportunity offered by the Home Secretary when he moved the second reading of the Prolongation of Parliament Bill. He then repeated the pledge already given by the Government that before a general election could be held facilities would be given for the discussion of the electoral system, so that there might be proper consideration of suggested reforms.

That our electoral system is far from perfect is acknowledged by members of all parties. It may be argued that the question of structure of the post-war Parliament is at present only of academic interest, but many will fear lest, by shelving the matter, we find ourselves unprepared for the serious problems which will arise at the end of the war. Consideration of the working of our electoral system is surely a matter of the first importance.

The War Cabinet’s plan for India, which was presented to the leaders of Indian opinion by Sir Stafford Cripps in March of this year, provided for the election of the Constitution-making body by the system of Proportional Representation. This recognition by the Government of the practicality of Proportional Representation raises the question whether this method should be applied in the election of the House of Commons, and makes all the more important an early consideration by Parliament of the defects of our own electoral system. The most suitable machinery for examining the problem would appear to be a Speaker’s Conference, on the lines of the one appointed during the last war.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Anyone know if the pledge for “discussion of the electoral system” was fulfilled?

Apologies for the self-referential nature of this entry: it’s a blog post about a letter responding to a letter about blog posts, tagged with the keywords “Blogging” and “Letters”.

I have returned to the letters page of theguardian with this quip, which I decided to send rather than go to the effort of a proper rebuttal. The letter I was replying to was printed on Friday.

In other blogging news, I have spruced up the site a bit. Let me know what you think, and please report any problems. It’s not looking quite right on Firefox, so there’s some tweaking to be done.

From ads in yesterday’s Guardian, I found myself at the carbon footprint estimator. This is obviously part of BP’s promotional campaign designed to make us think that a giant oil company couldn’t possibly be a big polluter.

That aside, it’s quite a useful toy. Apparently my household’s carbon footprint is around 7 tonnes of CO2, which is below the national average of 10 tonnes. Much of this is because of my air travel, which I try to offset via this sort of site.

From today’s Guardian Corrections & Clarifications:

A caption with the page 13 photograph of Lucy Mangan, which accompanied the G2 feature, A month in Tescoland, October 7, stated in error that she had used concentrated fabric conditioner on her hair. She had used hair conditioner.

I always use 2-in-1 myself.